(01-03-2019 12:06 AM)AllTideUp Wrote:  

(12-30-2018 03:08 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-30-2018 01:22 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(12-30-2018 12:35 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(12-29-2018 01:33 AM)Phlipper33 Wrote:  Only thing I can think of to prevent bullpening would be to require starting pitchers to face an entire lineup at least once prior to being pulled, barring injury.

That would be a gross over-reaction to the B.S. stunt pulled by the Brewers' manager in the NLCS. Even the team that used "bullpenning" most often in 2018, the Rays, still had a pitcher throw at least 5 innings in all but about 10 games. The limitations of the 25-man roster almost require that, unless a team carries 15 pitchers (not gonna happen) or uses at least 3 of its relievers almost every day of the season (not gonna happen). There's no need to add any such rules to a rule book that already has too many rules.

I think on the other hand that MLB is going to send a message that some things need to get reined in or there's going to be changes made. If there isn't something done now.... I don't think anyone in the MLB offices wants what we saw in 2018 to go any further than it already has.

There's no need to add more rules because there's not enough room on a roster to use 7 pitchers in a game more often than about once a week, and no one will do it even once a week unless a game has weird circumstances.

For that matter, the only game last season in which both teams used 7 pitchers in a 9 inning game only happened because of 40 player September rosters, and it wouldn't bother me at all if MLB made the roster limit 25 for the entire season, or even if they compromised about it and made the limit 27. As Mattingly said, the rule should be the same for the entire season.

Haven't kept up with the entire discussion on this thread, but I think you're on the right track.

Expand the roster a little bit and forget the 40-man phase. I've always hated it because it screwed with the fantasy baseball stats. Then I had an epiphany that if the virtual game is being altered then what in the world must it be doing to the real game? I'm a little slow sometimes.

Anyway, I wouldn't ban the shift if for no more reason than it forces hitters to hone their craft.

Also, there's a wrinkle you could add to the game that I think would solve a lot of issues for a lot of different people....

The DH should be in both leagues. The rule should be that whenever you remove your SP then your DH comes out of the lineup and the pitcher has to hit from there on out.

If you couple this with an expanded roster then I think it helps everyone one way or the other.

1. You get a little more offense with the DH.
2. The extra roster spots will keep more players in the game longer and making more money...the Union should like that.
3. The rule on removal will discourage teams from using openers instead of starters.
4. It adds a little more NL-like strategy to every game as the manager has to figure out when and how to replace his DH/SP.
5. It also makes the rules more uniform between leagues. I know the argument against that, but the argument for uniformity is the same one for dropping the 40-man roster. It monkeys with results...

My two biggest concerns: 1) Baseball doesn't need new rules, and 2) Bullpenning nee pitcher-by-committee/johnny allstaff/etc isn't new and it's a kind of fascinating aspect of the game dictated by unusual circumstances.

I understand the worry that bullpenning, if it spread, could wreck the sport but Wedge explained it really well. It's virtually impossible for a team to be in position where it would TRY to do this because it would require a roster of far too many pitchers.

MLB and the MLBPA did this to themselves via expansion. There are too many teams and not enough major league-ready pitchers, especially starters. The game cycles (and apparently so does the baseball); there are better ways to fix this than a bunch of complicated new rules. One of them is an expanded roster - definitely in favor of that over the end-of-season 40.